Pages

Sunday, 30 August 2015

Whether right to speedy trial is applicable to departmental inquiry?

The legal expectation of expedition and diligence being present atevery stage of a criminal trial and a fortiori in departmental inquiries hasbeen emphasised by this Court on numerous occasions. The ConstitutionBench in Abdul Rehman Antulay vs. R.S. Nayak, 1992 (1) SCC 225,underscored that this right to speedy trial is implicit in Article 21 of theConstitution and is also reflected in Section 309 of the Cr.P.C., 1973; that itencompasses all stages, viz., investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision andre-trial; that the burden lies on the prosecution to justify and explain thedelay; that the Court must engage in a balancing test to determine whetherthis right had been denied in the particular case before it. Keeping thesefactors in mind the CAT had in the case in hand directed that the Appellant’ssuspension would not be extended beyond 90 days from 19.3.2013. TheHigh Court had set aside this direction, viewing it as a substitution of ajudicial determination to the authority possessing that power, i.e., theGovernment. This conclusion of the High Court cannot be sustained inview of the following pronouncement of the Constitution Bench in Antulay: